- From: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:26:58 -0800
- To: "Henry Story" <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Cc: <tim.glover@bt.com>, <fugu13@mac.com>, <fmanola@acm.org>, <semantic-web@w3.org>
I would draw exactly the opposite conclusion from the real-world data. However, I don't have any particular bias or religion to boost, so my opinion may be unanchored. > -----Original Message----- > From: Henry Story [mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net] > Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 10:21 AM > To: Joshua Allen > Cc: tim.glover@bt.com; fugu13@mac.com; fmanola@acm.org; semantic- > web@w3.org > Subject: Re: How will the semantic web emerge: SPARQL end point and $$€€ > > > On 21 Dec 2005, at 19:08, Joshua Allen wrote: > > >> worth looking at this. If I were Barnes and Noble of la FNAC I would > >> try this out, before Amazon gets there. > > > > This motivation only works if there is credible evidence that > > Amazon is preparing to launch SPARQL endpoints, though. And even > > then, only if there is evidence that such endpoints would see broad > > adoption. > > Amazon as you point out below, has published web services, so that is > a good reason to try to do better. Furthermore those services are > more difficult to establish as you have to specify the query language > as well as the xml format. With RDF and SPARQL most of these problems > are already solved for you in a standard way. So life is a lot > easier. You have a much more powerful query mechanism, a much cleaner > semantics. No need to re-invent the wheel. > > >> Once more groups get their SPARQL end points out, I forsee that major > >> players will wish to standardise on some ontologies to: > > > > I believe we have enough specific evidence to counter this > > prediction already. Amazon has already exposed its business data > > in a variety of flavors: > > Exactly. That proves the point that if you put data on the web that > has value, people will use it whatever the obstacles are, as long as > it the obstacles are not bigger than the time required to invest in > accessing it. Amazon had to use RESTful web services, invent an XML > format and a query language as at the time they put their service > online SPARQL did not exist. All of this comes out automatically > from having a good ontology. The query mechanism is immediately > defined, and the whole thing is self documenting. > > > > > > 1) Web services with loose contract (POX over HTTP) > > Most successful for complex apps. > > > 2) Intermediate format -- RSS using some simple, well-known extensions > > most successful for very simple keeping up to date apps. > > > 3) Web services using tighter schema (SOAP and WSDL) > > Not successful. Too complicated. On the way to extinction. > > > Can you guess the relative adoption of each style? This is a > > pattern we see played out across the industry. > > So my point is that SPARQL will replace 1. It is RESTful enough and > avoid having to invent a query language and an XML format. > > Henry Story > http://bblfish.net/blog/
Received on Wednesday, 21 December 2005 18:27:17 UTC